Max du Preez recently launched a vehement attack on the Solidarity Movement (AfriForum and Solidarity). Du Preez's attacks form part of a broader campaign to cast aspersions on, demonise, and, in its most hysterical expressions, even criminalise the Solidarity Movement.

Senior African National Congress (ANC) figures within government, some other elements in the media, and the Economic Freedom Fighters leader Julius Malema are also participating in this campaign of vilification alongside Du Preez.

Last year, after Flip Buys and some colleagues from the Solidarity Movement visited Washington, DC, government officials pressed for Buys and his colleagues to be prosecuted for high treason. They were alleged to have spread false information about South Africa, specifically the South African government under ANC leadership.

Nothing came of the prosecution simply because the allegations were devoid of substance. The threats were hardly more than an attempt at intimidation. Besides, the ANC should be less concerned about falsehoods, which can be summarily debunked, than about the truth – the unprecedented failure of the South African state under ANC rule. And that is public knowledge – information about that does not need disseminating.

Investigative journalist James Myburgh, in turn, showed in damning detail how thoroughly Du Preez’s attacks collapse under scrutiny. Many of the concerns Du Preez smears the Solidarity Movement for harbouring in his current polemics, Du Preez himself shared with the Movement in his earlier writings.

Why then do Du Preez and his circle harbour such strong resentment towards the Solidarity Movement?

Convinced

The obvious answer is that Du Preez was convinced, with great satisfaction, during the constitutional transition in the mid-1990s that Afrikaners as a cultural-political factor had finally been consigned to the past. Yes, there would still be Afrikaners, but nothing more than mere individuals, who would not think of themselves as Afrikaners.

They would happily merge into a globalised world, of which the “New South Africa” would be a seamless part. They would enjoy their rugby, Comrades marathon (accolades to George and Gerda!), braai, sunshine, 4X4 trips in Africa, and other such pleasant things, applaud for the best Constitution in the world, get rich, and uncomplainingly fund the welfare state.

Du Preez apparently believed everything would be "sweet" as the dear English lady said in a TV interview at the time. And in Du Preez’s mind, it was especially sweet because Afrikanerdom as a collective political force was doomed.

But alas, to Du Preez's dismay – and seemingly growing resentment – all was not so sweet. The ANC in which Du Preez invested so much faith and energy has made the South African state a world leader in failure. I am, of course, also sorry about this. But unlike Du Preez, I am not surprised, because I, like many others, knew what to expect from liberation movements seizing the reins of government.

But Du Preez is even more troubled because the Afrikaner did not disappear as a cultural-political factor. This is evidenced by the fact that, despite formidable challenges, of which the hostile ANC is among the greatest, Afrikaners did not disappear. In fact, the Afrikaner shows remarkable vitality. The Afrikaners not only survived Apartheid; they are also now overcoming the current failing and hostile state.

This is the product of élan vital — a strong sense of community, a distinctive cultural, economic, and political vitality, and a sense of independence that Afrikaners have fortunately retained and which they are busy revitalising without control of the state.

New Institutions

Since the turn of the century, Afrikaners have begun building new institutions that provide the infrastructure for a community to survive and thrive. There are many of them. But the most powerful is undoubtedly the Solidarity Movement with all its subdivisions, among which AfriForum features prominently.

This is why the Solidarity Movement is the target of Du Preez's blunt and wobbly arrows: it provides an important part of the infrastructure for the Afrikaners' revival.

What makes the situation worse for Du Preez is that his furious attacks on Solidarity are strikingly ineffective. With each attack, he sinks into deeper isolation. The attacks cause an online kerfuffle, but they have no penetration and leave no lasting mark.

The reason is that Afrikaners support the Solidarity Movement in large numbers. Many of those who are not members of one or more of the components of the Movement are supporters, sympathisers, and contributors, even if they also have their reservations about it.

At the same time, many non-Afrikaners, including many – perhaps millions – of black people, view the Movement with respect and appreciation. There is evidence of this everywhere.

Caring Nationalism

Afrikaners and non-Afrikaners alike see and understand what Du Preez, owing to his self-blinding aversion, cannot. The Solidarity Movement, in tune with the vast majority of Afrikaners, represents a new Afrikaner nationalism. This is a caring nationalism that has shed the domineering and chauvinistic strains Afrikaner nationalism showed at times in the past, and it reflects the disposition of most Afrikaners today.

This involves the Solidarity Movement establishing and expanding institutions that care for and empower Afrikaners: in addition to many others, a welfare institution known as Solidarity Helping Hand and a school support centre.

Sol-Tech has been operating as an evidently successful institution for some time. Akademia, a private university, already serves several thousand students. Currently, several billions are being invested in the construction of the new Akademia campus on the eastern outskirts of Pretoria. A second campus is already underway – and land has been acquired for construction in Paarl in the Western Cape.

These projects, like many others that Dirk Hermann listed the other day, attest to this caring nationalism.

The only Afrikaners who do not identify with this are small bands of the extreme far-right and far-left flanks among the community.

No Extremism

Given the caring character of this nationalism, it is futile to look for political or religious extremism in the Movement. It is clearly not the strict Christian nationalism of the olden days.

But a caring Afrikaner nationalism must obviously take account of non-Afrikaners and cultivate healthy relationships with them. This is exactly what the Movement is demonstrating, with AfriForum in particular.

AfriForum has a department for intercultural relations with other communities, especially black communities, countrywide. AfriForum and, therefore, the broader Movement are probably more involved in intercultural activities than any other institution in South Africa. The important feature of this is the focus on joint, mutually beneficial projects, for example, in the fields of agricultural development, heritage conservation, and the restoration of mother tongues. All these   go well beyond mere symbolic joint meetings.

Of course, the Solidarity Movement is not above criticism, but its positive qualities simply far outweigh the criticism that can be levelled against it. And of course, the Movement is not the only participant in this caring Afrikaner nationalism. Many other formations are taking part in this, including many with no formal or even informal relations with the Movement.

A quarter of a century ago, Professor Danie Goosen, together with a few others, envisioned a revived Afrikanerdom and did much of the intellectual groundwork for it. That renewed Afrikanerdom, carried by a caring nationalism, is now a major force. In stark contrast to the failing state, it is one of the most successful social forces of our time. It is also an example of what other communities may do in the face of a decaying and frankly malicious state.

Du Preez's attacks may have packed a punch once upon a time, but they are completely ineffectual now. 

If he wants to escape his political loneliness and free himself from his unhealthy resentment, he has more to gain by contributing to the Solidarity Movement, or even just gratefully enjoying its benevolent successes, than in expending his energy on resentful and ultimately self-discrediting attacks.